I do have some thoughts on this matter, but am just back from Seattle & need some time to mull. What comes to mind initially is that since most TF mail also goes to mi-ep, is there any reason to add folks to both? Is JeffCo willing to be part of the TF, or are they already, just by virtue of what they represent?

Janet's point is well taken... Is our process of interest or our decisions? Wording this thought differently, might it be better to send most our "lurkers" a distillation or decision track, rather than our repeats? If someone, like Rita in this case, with many years of advantageous experience, is interested in being a "lurker," that is whom I'd agree to put on the "read only" list.

We may find that we should have a "marine division" for Marty so that we also can "lurk" on his correspondence as well as he on ours. I think he should be on miep/marine.

I say Jeffco has no reason just to lurk on our matters. When information should be sent to that entity, it will be.

Fine with me too. However, I would not want to add many lurkers to our subscribers list. I say this only that I do not want to add more voices of partial participants to our business conversations. These lurkers should have “read only” access until they are fully integrated into the business of either MIEP or MIEP-TF, or both.

From my perspective being subjected to lots of emails doesn't sound like a way to get people to step in, but maybe some people like that sort of thing. Please make sure they have an idea of the number of emails per month on average. (a count of some of the miep letters in my inbox for May exceeded 50)